Mark Lenz: Notice: You're an imminent threat

Worried about the White House killing American citizens without due process? Why not look at this as a product recall, and start requiring government “Pre-obituary legals”?

Mark LenzEditor of The Daily Telegram

Some people read the Telegram mostly to see obituaries. Others check government legal notices, like the lists of who didn't pay a tax bill and risks losing their property.

Together, the two categories could solve questions raised by last week's leaked White House "white paper," the one about using drones to kill American citizens overseas without any legal proceedings. It caused a little fuss.

"How the absence of due process could be magically transformed into its satisfaction is never stated or explained," Noah Feldman, a professor of constitutional and international law at Harvard, wrote of the policy in a column titled "Obama's Drone Attack on Your Due Process."

" 'Secret law" is an oxymoron," added Mary Ellen O'Connell, a professor of law at the University of Notre Dame, in a New York Times column.

Answer? Federal "Pre-obituary legals"! Something like, "Attention Miss Gihan Mohsen Baker: We believe you have joined al-Qaida and present an imminent threat. You have 30 days to answer in Federal Court, or a summary judgment will be delivered by drone. Warmly, President Obama."

Maybe you think I'm trying to be funny. Not at all. The real comics are people who say government needs to notify shoppers who bought Skechers "Toning Shoes" that they're entitled to a refund, but who don't see any point in notifying Americans that we plan to blow them up. I'm just trying to solve this.

Does my modest proposal pose challenges? Sure. For one thing, I realize it's icky for the White House to publicly accuse people of having imminent, actual plans. We saw with the Hutaree case how that turned out for Eric Holder's Justice Department. But the White House has evolved. Using a Magic 8-Ball, "imminent" was legally redefined as "Reply hazy, try again."

Besides, the Executive Branch wouldn't accuse anyone of being an imminent threat if they weren't guilty, right? As the Founding Fathers were fond of saying, "Due process; shoe sausage. Who needs 'checks and balances' or judicial oversight?"

That's the genius of the new phrase "dead militants" — nobody with legal standing to challenge it is, um, standing.

Still, I'm old-fashioned. I'd like to see a note. And the Telegram has seven-day delivery. How many newspapers in Michigan can say that anymore? Yes, our headlines could meet your deadlines.

"But Mark," you exclaim, "no 16-year-old being killed overseas — even if he was born in Denver — cares about newspapers."

Au contraire. We've advanced technologically. We're now on Facebook. Let's set it up. "Like" us to see if Uncle Sam wants to kill you. I predict a spike in reader interest.

On Twitter, we could retweet: "@POTUS Hey, Karl Rove, when I said GOP 'enemies' and 'hostage takers' I meant it. 30 days. See you in court. Or not. #DroningOn"

True, breaking up via Twitter is tacky. So here's another idea. Tweak the First Lady's nutritional My Plate program. Make it interactive to see if your daily intake of anti-American videos is pushing you into "dangerously unhealthy." ("If you're in this zone, don't worry about obesity killing you!")

Leave aside the big questions: Do drone strikes create more enemies? How many innocent civilians also die? Are these Americans actually committing "treason"? The Constitution clearly lays out due process for treason. (Maybe that's why none dare call it treason.)

So let's call it a "product recall." I'm not asking for the sort of hearings or safeguards that government applies to important stuff: spotted owl habitat, disputed wetlands, the caloric content of restaurant menu items.

All I'm asking is, can't we give U.S. recipients of drone killings the same standard we apply to Skechers refunds or overdue property taxes?

Mark Lenz, editor of The Daily Telegram, can be contacted at 265-5111, ext. 230, or via email at mlenz@lenconnect.com. He is deliberately using an old photo to confuse drones.